14 comments

  • deweller 0 minutes ago
    A "few seconds" to pay in bitcoin? So the captain is supposed to be watching for a response via email with his finger hovering over the pay button? Is the recipient address static? Surely they would use unique payment addresses if they have any hope of obfuscating payments.

    This all sounds more like a TV show script than an actual thought-out plan to me.

  • mvkel 1 hour ago
    Something is very fishy about all of this.

    Is there a chance that the US -wanted- the strait closed so they could look like they got it to reopen, now with fees, which ultimately funnel back to the US?

    It would be a way to exploit the natural resources of the Middle East without needing to invade.

    • rhubarbtree 17 minutes ago
      Unlikely. Iran is winning this war, or hadn’t you noticed? No need to pay America off when they’re desperate for a deal.
      • nickff 5 minutes ago
        To define victory, you'd need to know their political objectives, which neither side has declared or otherwise made clear. On the one hand, the USA was unable to completely restrain Iran's ability to wreak local havoc, but on the other, Iran had many of its assets damaged, and now seems completely unable to prevent foreign actors from using its airspace almost at-will. It seems like the situation has shifted, and the result is inconclusive.
    • jasonvorhe 1 minute ago
      Israel for last, perhaps? One can dream.
    • seanhunter 16 minutes ago
      The war has been costing the US in the region of 30B per day by some estimates. Fees per ship are around $1m . It wouldn't make any sense.
      • convolvatron 13 minutes ago
        not a big fan of this theory, but as we've seen in other instances, money from the public coffer is 'free', so even at a substantial loss, if the result ends up in the right private account, its still a net win for someone. and net a loss for the public even larger than "I'm suing the government for $50B, oh wait, that's me, I guess I'll just have to pay myself"
        • nitwit005 2 minutes ago
          There are much easier ways to convert the US military budget into someone's personal wealth.
    • xeromal 35 minutes ago
      Why would Iran give the US fees?
      • grumple 32 minutes ago
        Behind the scenes, they may have already conceded to paying Trump off just like the other gulf states.
        • damnesian 23 minutes ago
          plausible, esp in light of all the things.
    • oa335 33 minutes ago
      “ ABC News’s Jonathan Karl asked Trump if he approved of Iran’s plan to charge vessels a fee for passing through the strait — a key channel through which roughly 20 percent of the world’s oil is transported. “We’re thinking of doing it as a joint venture,” the president told Karl, who shared Trump’s response on social platform X. “It’s a way of securing it — also securing it from lots of other people. It’s a beautiful thing.””

      I bet Trump will justify it as compensation for US “security” guarantees to Gulf States.

      https://thehill.com/policy/international/5821343-trump-us-ir...

    • itsdesmond 13 minutes ago
      Is this that 4d chess bullshit y’all keep embarrassing yourselves with? There’s no plan.
    • stefan_ 20 minutes ago
      No, the US leadership is just really that inept to not have anticipated this extremely likely outcome in Iran closing the strait. Now watch em celebrate this great victory in media spin.

      Also of course if you want to profit, you can always just insider trade! A favorite of the administration. Someone bet a cool billion just yesterday that oil prices would go down. And would you believe it.

    • timcobb 34 minutes ago
      Is this Breitbart comments what's going on here?
    • dist-epoch 27 minutes ago
      Iran and the CIA are perfectly capable of moving physical or digital dollars if they wanted, there is no need for bitcoin. In fact it's much more likely for bitcoin payments to Trump to be detected than digital dollars.
    • bT3xgGVF 33 minutes ago
      [dead]
  • iugtmkbdfil834 1 hour ago
    It is interesting in several different ways, because I was speculating on how it is being done before current cease fire. Everything seemed to be point to Yuan ( or other non-USD currencies ), which then are more easily settled by vessel owners and likely buried under some non-descript names like fees to be , maybe, questioned later its all done.

    edit: And it seems I was wrong despite it being my initial thought in terms of used rail.

    • logicchains 24 minutes ago
      It's a sad indictment of the RMB that Iran would rather use BTC for bypassing US sanctions.
  • belorn 1 hour ago
    Does this mean ceasefire is now broken? The 10 point plan was to be discussed later in the peace talks, but what was the exact conditions that predicated the ceasefire?
    • wodenokoto 1 hour ago
      Isn't it broken with Israel continuing their war against Lebanon?
      • belorn 1 hour ago
        Definitively if they agreed to it as part of the ceasefire. What did each part actually agree to when they agreed to a ceasefire? There doesn't seem to be much concrete information about that part.
      • jMyles 1 hour ago
        As best I can tell, the Iranian regime and Sharif both said that they ceasefire included a cease to strikes on Lebanon, Netanyahu explicitly said that it did not, and the Trump admin, Lebanon, and Hezbollah have not yet commented either way.

        Links to Pakistan and Israel statements here: https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2026/4/8/us-iran-ceasefire-de...

        • fernandopj 6 minutes ago
          Iran is ATM saying it closed the Strait again, implied that it will wait until Israel stand down at least.

          Even if USA insist on Israel-Hezbollah (and so Lebanon) be kept apart from any deal to end their war in Iran, it would still mean a terrible strategic and diplomatic disaster between USA and Israel, because Israel Gov' will be left with two terrible scenarios:

          1) Trump Admin' will concede to Iran they'd be leaving the region and leaving Israel to defend itself alone, because the Hormuz being open for business and the Gulf states being spared would be enough; or

          2) USA will have to resume hostilities, meaning domestically Trump will have to explain the US Military is obliged to continue the war effort for as long as Israel want.

          IMHO don't see how Israel-US can politically survive those two scenarios.

        • Pay08 24 minutes ago
          Lebanon has also said that the ceasefire doesn't apply to Hezbollah, since they insist that both them and Israel are at war with Hezbollah, not with each other. The only parties that say it does are Hezbollah and Pakistan.

          Also, I really wouldn't suggest using aljazeera.

        • GeoPolAlt 1 hour ago
          Trump and Leavitt have both said that Lebanon is not part of the ceasefire
    • bluGill 21 minutes ago
      too early to say. You always ask for more than you can possibly get in these things so that you have something to compromise on (it is stupid but that is how that game is played)
    • insane_dreamer 1 hour ago
      No - the Iranian's didn't say they were letting ships through for free
  • dragonelite 1 hour ago
    The FT trying to push markets and capital again? If they do everyone can just track their bitcoin transactions..
  • wongarsu 2 hours ago
    I was under the impression that they were asking for payment in stablecoins, not bitcoin? Did they change their mind?
    • Hendrikto 1 hour ago
      Given that 99% of stablecoins are USD-denominated, and that the vast, vast majority of those are custodial, Bitcoin makes much more sense for Iran.
      • Pay08 23 minutes ago
        With Iran's hyperinflation, why wouldn't USD make sense?
        • ultrattronic 11 minutes ago
          I think they’re kinda mad at the US at the moment
    • vunderba 1 hour ago
      I’ve heard a lot of discussion about them accepting payments in Chinese yuan. I wonder if there’s a stablecoin pegged to it.
      • skippyboxedhero 1 minute ago
        China issued a stable coin about five years ago. It is used for all retail payments. Somewhat bizarrely, it is significantly more privacy-protecting than payments in the West.

        Quite funny to read comments from people asking what use is crypto. Can tell they have probably never left West Virgina.

    • wslh 1 hour ago
      That would be very risky for Iran because the top stablecoins could be freezed. They are centralized.
  • pavlov 3 hours ago
    ”Hosseini said that each tanker must email authorities about its cargo, after which Iran will inform them of the toll to be paid in digital currencies.

    “He said that the tariff is $1 per barrel of oil, adding that empty tankers can pass freely.

    “‘Once the email arrives and Iran completes its assessment, vessels are given a few seconds to pay in bitcoin, ensuring they can’t be traced or confiscated due to sanctions,’ Hosseini added.”

    • deltoidmaximus 2 hours ago
      As bitcoin is quite traceable I don't see how this works if you're trying to avoid sanctions. For Iran it probably doesn't matter but for the vessel owners it probably does.
      • iugtmkbdfil834 1 hour ago
        Yes, from sanctions perspective, the vessel owners seem to have more exposure than Iran -- as crazy as it sounds on the surface.
      • dist-epoch 25 minutes ago
        One of Iran's demand for a peace agreement is the removal of all sanctions.
      • tomasphan 1 hour ago
        Business idea - Iran Bitcoin fee intermediary. Realistically the CIA will handle this for US companies and maybe allies until they figure something out.
        • CapricornNoble 17 minutes ago
          Didn't Tornado Cash get un-sanctioned recently? Can't you just use that?
      • palata 1 hour ago
        Agreed, but I wonder it if matters in practice. It's not like one can boycott bitcoins by serial number or something, is it?
      • insane_dreamer 1 hour ago
        the issue is the US' ability to freeze USD bank accounts on its soil or pressuring other banks to do the same
    • gustavus 2 hours ago
      So apart from all the geopolitics of it this line is interesting

      "few seconds to pay in bitcoin, ensuring they can’t be traced or confiscated due to sanctions,’ Hosseini added"

      Maybe I'm ignorant of Bitcoin but isn't Bitcoin transactions recorded in a public cryptographically signed ledger? Isn't that literally the opposite of "can't be traced"?

      • zulux 1 hour ago
        And if you knew the manifests (quantity of oil) for the ship, just the value of the bitcount transaction could be used for tracking.
        • mbreese 31 minutes ago
          Or, if you knew the bitcoin addresses, you could figure out exactly how much oil is being moved. I would think oil data analysts would love to have access to that data (if they don't already).
    • jmclnx 1 hour ago
      Cannot get to the article, so:

      https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/iran-warns-tankers-they...

      What is to stop the ships from lying ? I wonder if Iran will do spot check of some ships to prevent this. And will boarding ships cause Trump to have yet another breakdown ?

      • onlypassingthru 51 minutes ago
        Because ship displacement is really hard to disguise? It's probably like trying to sneak your friend in to the movies under your overcoat.
      • bethekidyouwant 1 hour ago
        Lying about their cargo? Can’t lie about the weight … Probably the savings from lying about the nature of the cargo is not worth the risk of exploding..
  • SilasX 1 hour ago
    I did a double-take at it being Bitcoin fees, since you'd think they'd want some stablecoin (even if not USD) so as to avoid inheriting the volatility, but no, they want Bitcoin specifically:

    >“Once the email arrives and Iran completes its assessment, vessels are given a few seconds to pay in Bitcoin, ensuring they can’t be traced or confiscated due to sanctions,” FT reported, citing Hosseini.

    https://beincrypto.com/iran-bitcoin-toll-hormuz-strait-tanke...

    • cjbgkagh 15 minutes ago
      Paid in bitcoins denominated in USD so the price is stable, just a small carry risk while holding.
  • GeoPolAlt 2 hours ago
    I think this war will be the moment that historians mark as the death of Pax Americana. The US failed to change the Iranian regime, failed to open the strait, and now a previously international waterway will be tolled in a currency other than the dollar.

    I wish it need not have happened in my time

    • cjs_ac 1 hour ago
      This war will be to the US what the Suez Crisis was to the United Kingdom.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suez_Crisis

      • Pay08 21 minutes ago
        That's far too hyperbolic. Abject failures don't lead to state or power collapse. Look at how many wars the Romans lost, and far more catastrophically too.
      • puelocesar 1 hour ago
        TIL about one more time Israel was invading it's neighbors..
        • grumple 24 minutes ago
          You should focus on the part where Egypt blockaded the Suez and Straits of Tiran, which is what actually caused the war.
    • Havoc 1 hour ago
      I’d say there is a credible case for saying the vote for 2nd round of trump was the turning point. By that point is was already pretty well established that he isn’t fit yet that’s what the public wanted.
    • pokstad 1 hour ago
      TBF, Iran is saying an exorbitant price right now, but in reality they will need to balance their price with demand to bring in the maximum possible revenue. The toll may work out in the long run.
      • cjbgkagh 12 minutes ago
        AFAIK they only let two ships pass before closing it again due to Israeli strikes on Lebanon, so in effect the strait is still closed and likely to remain so.
      • ux266478 45 minutes ago
        Very Large Crude Carriers carry ~2 million barrels of oil. Ultra Large Crude Carriers double that. If oil went down to $50/Bbl, that $2 million fee amounts to a ~2% tax per ship, given their cargo capacity. It's not particularly exorbitant, especially given that the entire reason they proposed this toll was to fund their rebuilding efforts (Americans and Israelis did a lot of damage that's been under-reported and ignored)

        This conflict has been an interesting case of watching mass hysteria interact with propaganda in the newform, rapid pace of media that exists in the internet age. The amount of wild conjecture, speculation, misinformation is the most extreme I've ever seen it, eclipsing even the 6 months of nonsense that was spurred on by the Russian invasion of Ukraine.

      • ivell 1 hour ago
        I think the price can only increase. There is not much competition for Hormuz. If it is exorbitant now, it can only be more expensive later on. The demand for oil is not going to go down drastically for quite a few years.

        If there was another route, the oil would have found the way.

        • rhubarbtree 15 minutes ago
          There are already pipelines in the region.
        • pas 1 hour ago
          pipelines, railway, etc.

          had the US had any real plan to empower the Gulf states against Iran there would already be backup routes

          • Tostino 49 minutes ago
            Pipelines are incredibly vulnerable to being taken offline by an inexpensive long-range strike. You can't just put them in the middle of a war zone, especially when we (the US) have targeted that same type of infrastructure first.
            • citrin_ru 21 minutes ago
              Pipelines are usually buried under the ground. Pumping statins could be protected by short range SAM systems. An undegraund pipeline can be destroyed by a heavy glide bomd (not an option for Iran) but should be relatively safe from shahed drones. Iran's ballistic rockets are not precise enough to hit a pipeline wihtout spending multiple rockets (in which case it would be cheaper to repair the pipeline than to produce all these rockets).
            • pas 41 minutes ago
              sure, as the oil wells and the pumping stations and everything not underground, but right now there's not even an option to try. (also loss of a pipe section compared to the loss of a tanker is much better economically, easy to replace, not to mention that there's no loss of life, so ultimately it can bear more risk even if there's an active conflict.)
        • thatguy0900 1 hour ago
          In time pipelines can be made, no? 2 million per ship already gives a lot of room for exorbitant infrastructure projects to break even in the medium term
          • 1attice 42 minutes ago
            Pipelines take years, even decades, at least here in Canada. You'd be surprised at how many billions of dollars and person-years of labour you need to get the thing turned on.

            Five years at 2mil per ship will make Iran rich.

      • tantalor 1 hour ago
        The problem is the fee has nothing material to do with the straight itself. There are no maintenance costs for the open sea. Coordination is also not a big concern, you can tell because previously ships were able to pass without incident and coordinate among themselves.

        Actually, this is extortion. Meaning that it is done under threat of violence. Worse yet, the US military may end up enforcing this, and collecting on a share of the fees.

        It won't take very long for Iran to recoup the damages. After that, why keep the fees going? Because it's free money, that's why.

        The strange this is, if the US and Iran can partner on this, that would lead to a weird peace, because they both stand to benefit, meanwhile countries that depend on the straight (Korea, Japan, etc.) have to pay the bill.

        • ux266478 36 minutes ago
          > There are no maintenance costs for the open sea.

          There are massive maintenance costs for the open sea with how we utilize it. Maritime security and policing, navigational infrastructure, weather reporting, radio repeaters, international bureaucracy, etc.

          Global maritime trade is extremely costly. It's simply hidden behind opaque public spending on things you don't think about. In all likelihood it's a sunk cost that would ballpark around a few hundred billion dollars annually, invisible money spent just to keep things running at the scale and reliability that they do.

          Now the maritime traffic passing through the Strait of Hormuz may only partially overlap with this spending, but people greatly overestimate just how "cheap" maritime activity actually is.

        • orwin 1 hour ago
          I don't think this count as open sea. The rule is 12 miles from the coast (12 nautical miles btw, i don't know what it is in freedom units). i'm pretty sure the strait is narrower than that at the place where the toll is paid (if you count both side, i.e less than 24 miles Between Oman's peninsula i forgot the name of, and Hormuz/Qeshm islands).

          So basically, Iran say "here, you have to pass through our or Oman's waters, we will let you, but please pay a toll for the derangement, that we will share with Oman."

        • insane_dreamer 1 hour ago
          > extortion

          not really; you would have to pay to run an oil pipeline through another country's territory even if that country wasn't bearing the cost of maintaining the oil pipeline

          the strait isn't international waters -- it's part of Iran and Oman's territorial waters

          • citrin_ru 27 minutes ago
            For land pipelines thiere no eqauvalent of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea according to which both Oman and Iran should allow free passage of ships. And "normal" path lies on Oman's waters which dones't stop Iran from attacking ships there. The strait toll is a pure racketeering.
    • dist-epoch 24 minutes ago
      You forgot that now Iran will become a nuclear state.

      An American Iranian expert which studied this region for 20 years predicted that Iran will do a nuclear test in September, ahead of the mid-term elections. We'll see.

      • Pay08 20 minutes ago
        For all intents and purposes, they have been a nuclear state for 30 years.
    • pavlov 2 hours ago
      Trump promised the most crypto-friendly US administration ever, but this is probably not what Republicans had in mind.
    • keybored 1 hour ago
      I think it’s weird that you imply that it is because the American regime failed to change the Iranian regime. They (lead by Israel or not) illegally invaded a country.

      It’s just Pax for those parts of the world that America and its allies are not invading (and other non-allied examples like Russia invading Ukraine).

      But a typical top-comment about how America Did a Bad Thing Which Ruined The Good American-lead Times.

      • jMyles 1 hour ago
        > It’s just Pax for those parts of the world that America and its allies are not invading

        Aren't you making the very point you purport to refute? What's so different about this than Rome circa 50 BC? They even invaded Persia!

    • churchill 2 hours ago
      [dead]
    • 762236 1 hour ago
      No air war has changed a regime. The US government knows this. Trump knows this and never had regime change as an objective. Why are you saying that regime change was an objective, and how do you think it was going to happen in an air war when no air war has caused a regime change before?
      • Pay08 19 minutes ago
        No air war has ever tried to change a regime. The fact of the matter is, we don't know what will happen next. There could very well be a civil war.
      • ks2048 19 minutes ago
        > Trump knows this

        This statement is very rarely true.

      • soco 1 hour ago
        Little correction: Trump has a different objective every second day, and at some point there was (also) regime change on the menu. Might come again, I don't know.
      • whateveracct 1 hour ago
        Trump was talking about the protests there and that the US would help them. And we kept killing Iranian leadership lol.

        Why are you taking what the Trump admin says at face value, anyways? Are you still a fool after all these years? This is like "fool me a 10,000th time" by now haaha

        • 762236 1 hour ago
          What he says matches to reality: that regime change isn't possible with an air war. Thus even if you don't listen to him, we know from prior experience that regime change is highly improbable. Every person educated about these things knows that.
    • Incipient 1 hour ago
      I can't believe that the toll will actually be paid - it would turn Iran into an INSANELY wealthy superpower and easily give them the funds to hugely increase their availability to fund groups like hezbollah etc.
  • jmyeet 1 hour ago
    I personally think is the US's Teutoburg Forest moment [1]. Rome was capable of rebuilding legions. After all, they'd done so historically (eg after the Battle of Cannae [2]) but Teutoburg really exposed the rot and dysfunction within the Rome. I personally believe this event will be a turning point in redefining the relationships with Europe, the Gulf states and Israel.

    Details on this deal are sketchy but it seems like Iran will continue charging a toll for the Strait of Hormuz (of approximately $1/barrel). You hear figures like $2 million but bear in mind that VLCCs/ULCCs can carry 2M+ barrels of oil. Also, it seems like there will be significant sanctions relief.

    Here's the problem: how does Iran get paid? Normally that would be through international payments systems but the US exerts a lot of control over those and can freeze assets as they've done in the past. Part of the payments under the previous JCPOA [3] were to return money paid to Iran for oil where those payments had been frozen. Russia got locked out of SWIFT after the Ukraine invasion [4] as another example.

    So I see this as a defensive and potentially temporary move to avoid the risk of asset seizure and freezing should hostilities resume. Iran may well end up with access to international payments systems again in the coming weeks, at which point this could all change.

    It is interesting that crypto is being used for this but that just goes to the point that the use case for crypto is to bypass laws. That's no different here.

    [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Teutoburg_Forest

    [2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Cannae

    [3]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_nuclear_deal

    [4]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SWIFT_ban_against_Russian_bank...

    • Hendrikto 1 hour ago
      The point of crypto is to cut out the middleman, to bypass authoritarianism, to bypass censorship, to not have to trust anybody.

      The US being able to just cut off people from the financial system is seen as very problematic by anyone outside the US.

  • OutOfHere 1 hour ago
  • FeloniousHam 2 hours ago
    Finally, the Real World use case for Bitcoin!
    • pokstad 1 hour ago
      Ransomware payments, speculative trading, now paying off oil pirates!
      • SilasX 1 hour ago
        Iran is a recognized national government, not a pirate.

        Oh crud I just opened a can of worms with that, didn't I?

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pirates_and_Emperors

        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UQBWGo7pef8

      • OutOfHere 1 hour ago
        I am afraid that soon, actual sea pirates, e.g. in Central and South America, Africa, etc. will start using naval mines in their regional seas, demanding crypto payment from passing ships.
        • thatguy0900 1 hour ago
          I'm not sure most people have the strength of conviction in their God to stare down the us navy like Iran does.
          • keybored 1 hour ago
            Do drones need conviction?
            • thatguy0900 1 hour ago
              The person launching them sure does. This scenario reminds me of the time Russian hackers took over a US pipeline a couple years ago then immediately apologized saying they didn't want to cause a international incident and they would vet their targets better in the future. There are not many people who want that kind of heat. Like the first ayatollah is dead and the second is reportedly in a coma. The Iranian government is willing to pay that price and that's why they won. How many pirate leaders do you think are willing to pay their life so that their third of fourth successors can maybe collect a toll? Or how many are like Venezuela and you can kidnap one guy and the whole house folds.
          • OutOfHere 1 hour ago
            It doesn't have to be a US Navy ship that they target. They could target anyone else. The mines are intelligent in who they target.
            • thatguy0900 1 hour ago
              If they're dropping mines then the navy will be the targets eventually.
      • staplers 1 hour ago
        Things that have never happened with USD. Glad we have a truly clean pure money that is incorruptible unlike bitcoin.
    • OutOfHere 1 hour ago
      Cryptocurrency has had many legal real world uses cases. It is used heavily in prediction markets. Serving as an inflation-resistant store of value that is orthogonal to gold also is an implicit real world use case. Permissionless and easy international transfer of funds between individuals has been the biggest real world use. It's not only for collecting and trading. Obviously, those wanting to suppress it will keep finding excuses.
      • _DeadFred_ 1 hour ago
        Defending crypto as legitimate by adding 'it's also useful for gambling to get around regulation' is wild.
      • GJim 1 hour ago
        I confess I'm not entirely sure if this is satire or if you are a true believer. Well done!
      • nprz 1 hour ago
        Lol at the downvotes. People get so mad if you say you prefer one imaginary ledger over another.
        • OutOfHere 1 hour ago
          The same people have no idea what's coming for them even when it's in their face as with the posted news article. If the US doesn't act now to restore the use of USD in Hormuz, it's the beginning of the end of the for the USD as a currency for international trade.
    • user____name 1 hour ago
      Should just pay in pure cocaine, cut out the crypto middlemen.
  • kinakomochidayo 2 hours ago
    Pretty crazy for countries to demand Bitcoin that has no clear plans for quantum. Not to mention security budget issues.